WASHINGTON — President Trump plans to keep United States troops in Iraq to monitor and maintain pressure on neighboring Iran, committing to an American military presence in the region’s war zones even as he moves to withdraw forces from Syria and Afghanistan.

“I want to be able to watch Iran,” Mr. Trump said in an interview aired Sunday on CBS’s “Face the Nation.” “We’re going to keep watching and we’re going to keep seeing and if there’s trouble, if somebody is looking to do nuclear weapons or other things, we’re going to know it before they do.”

Mr. Trump’s comments come as the United States has quietly been negotiating with Iraq for weeks to allow perhaps hundreds of American commandos and support troops now operating in Syria to shift to bases in Iraq and strike the Islamic State from there. Military leaders are seeking to maintain pressure on the militant group as the president fundamentally reorders policy toward Syria and toward Afghanistan, where peace talks with the Taliban are underway.

But senior American officers and diplomats said Mr. Trump’s comments could undercut the delicate negotiations in Iraq by inflaming fears among the Iraqis that the moves would be a guise to check Iran, potentially straining ties with Baghdad and weakening the ability of the United States to respond to Islamic State remnants in Syria.

If the Americans try to bring more troops to Iraq, said Jawad al-Musawi, a member of Parliament, “there will be an escalation in the opposition to them.”

“There is distrust of the American government — even if they say they are coming to protect us against Daesh,” he said, using the Arabic word for the Islamic State, “the real reason they will be coming is to hit Iran.”

To maintain a military mission in Syria despite Mr. Trump’s order to withdraw troops from the country, a plan has gained momentum within the Pentagon to use small teams of Special Operations forces to strike the Islamic State, as well as to continue airstrikes and resupplying allied Kurdish fighters.

Senior American officers recently visited several Iraqi bases, including Erbil and Al Asad Air Base as well as smaller ones closer to the Syrian border, to determine if existing American operations there could be expanded with troops shifting in from Syria, two United States officials said. Another American officer visited at least one Iraqi base near the Iranian border, a Kurdish politician said.

Col. Sean Ryan, a spokesman for the American-led coalition in Baghdad, said in an email that he had no information about the base visits.

Video

transcript

bars

0:00/10:14

-0:00

transcript

First Came ISIS, Then Iran: How the Mission at a U.S. Base in Syria Kept Growing

President Trump has ordered the withdrawal of U.S. military forces from Syria. But the unexpectedly large role of Al-Tanf, a small U.S. outpost in Syria, reveals why leaving the country won’t be so easy.

What can a remote outpost tell us about how the U.S. got pulled so deep into Syria’s war? The answer might be easiest to understand if we start out small. In March of 2016 — a series of victories in a desolate patch of the Syrian desert. A band of rebels captures a border crossing. And then they move and capture a rectangular compound that’s been in the hands of the Islamic State. Now, like a lot of forces in Syria, big and small, these guys want to be known. They’d sent out promotional videos. They’d made the TV news. They’d even made a YouTube page, and asked visitors to subscribe, to follow along while they go fight ISIS. But all these videos, they tell us something else. American weapon. American weapon. American weapon. And all this propaganda? Behind the scenes are coalition advisers. They’re coaching the rebels with how to introduce themselves to the world. They’re backing the rebels because, at the time, this was part of America’s big plan for defeating the Islamic State in Syria: Train and equip local rebels to do the fighting. “We will advise, and we will assist.” These rebels are called the New Syrian Army. And that compound they captured? That rectangle in the desert? It turned into a small military base called Al-Tanf. That’s far away from all other U.S. and coalition bases in Syria. In the years to come, the base will be attacked by ISIS, threatened by Iranian proxies and become the subject of Russian conspiracy theories. This base will illustrate how it can be easy to get involved in a war — “This is a transnational long-term threat.” — but much harder to get out of one. “Senator, that would have to be provided in a different setting.” “Wait a minute.” “Why can’t you — “ “Wait. Wait a minute.” How the mission can change in unexpected ways. But the original mission, of course, was to defeat the Islamic State. The choice of Al-Tanf as a base was a good one. Right off the bat, the rebels build a couple walls. And this gives them control of a major road. That lets them disrupt the Islamic State’s ability to move between Syria and Iraq, and to stop them from entering Jordan, which is an important American ally. But the rebels’ main objective is to use Al-Tanf as a staging ground to seize the region back from ISIS. In their first year, the rebels have some failures — — and they have some successes. American and coalition soldiers are there with them doing the training. The rebels managed to recapture a good amount of land, along with other rebel groups in the area. That’s seen in blue. But here’s where Al-Tanf is forced to take on an entirely new, entirely unexpected role, an example of America’s expanding mission in Syria — Iran. See, when the American-backed rebels capture land from ISIS — remember, that was their original mission — they’re also capturing land that President Bashar al-Assad wants back, after losing it earlier in the civil war that began in 2011. So the regime’s coming after them, like it or not. Iran’s been supporting the regime, and has its own reasons for wanting control of this rebel area. See this road that Al-Tanf’s on? It leads all the way to Iran. Iran wants to be the dominant player in the region. Do you think it wants a little U.S. base blocking a valuable supply route that carries Iranian influence and materiel all the way to the Mediterranean? No. So in the spring of 2017, the Syrian army and Iranian-backed militias decide to take the region back with an offensive. Their objective is to reach the Jordanian and Iraqi borders. In the way is Al-Tanf. And by this time, the U.S. has established a protective circle around the base that’s called a deconfliction zone. Basically, it means cross into that circle uninvited and you risk an American attack. But the pro-regime forces advance anyway. The Americans strike, saying it’s in self-defense. [explosion] These videos claim to show the strikes on pro-regime forces. [Arabic shouting, in reaction to blast] Then the Americans drop leaflets warning the oncoming forces to stay away from the deconfliction zone. But they keep coming. [explosion] And the U.S. keeps striking. And here’s where our story comes to a pivotal moment that shows just how messy it can be when you get involved in a civil war. The U.S. told the world that it was in Syria to fight the Islamic State. “Tonight, on my orders, America’s armed forces began strikes against ISIL targets in Syria.” And now, it’s attacking Syrians and Iranian proxies. “It was necessitated by offensive movement — I don’t know there were Iranians on the ground — but by Iranian-directed forces.” So now we get more American hardware coming in. Meanwhile, the base that looked like this when the rebels took over has now grown to look like this. But if Iran has become a factor in the U.S. mission in Syria, here’s an example of how the government doesn’t want to publicly admit that this has expanded the mission. So let’s head to Washington for a second. Don’t click away. I know congressional hearings aren’t always a thrill a minute, but this one — “— stand.” — gets interesting. “So let me — so what is the — “ A senator asks a high-ranking State Department official what U.S. troops will do in Syria once ISIS is defeated — “ — non-ISIS priorities.” — but question seems to strike a nerve. “Senator, that would have to be provided in a different setting.” He doesn’t want to say that Iran’s part of the Syrian strategy now. “Um.” “Why not?” “Wait a minute.” “Why can’t you — “ “Wait. Wait a minute. That won’t pass muster.” So he relents, just a bit. “We are deeply concerned with the activities of Iran, with the ability of Iran to enhance those activities through a greater ability to move materiel into Syria. And I would rather leave the discussion at that point.” The Iranian threat came just up the road from Al-Tanf. But America’s mission in Syria is also growing beyond ISIS because of what lies just 12 miles to the south — “Trapped in a no man’s land, but still the numbers grow.” — the lives of 50,000 refugees. 50,000. They live in a camp called Rukban. Many of them have fled the Syrian regime and the Islamic State. The camp is so close to Al-Tanf that it’s protected by the base’s deconfliction zone. “And we’re going to be present at Al-Tanf to make sure ISIS cannot return and also to manage this difficult humanitarian situation.” Hear that? Yet another reason to stay in Syria — protect the refugees. But these refugees serve another purpose — [Russian speech] — as props for Russian misinformation. See, Russia’s got bases in Syria, too. It wants to secure its own influence in the region. But the American presence in Syria, including at Al-Tanf, is getting in the way. So the Russians try to make the Americans and rebels at Al-Tanf look so bad that they’ll be forced to give it up. [Russian speech] They often claim that the Americans and rebels at Al-Tanf block aid shipments to the Rukban refugees, creating a humanitarian crisis. But the internet is also full of conspiracy theories about the base. Some seem to have been influenced by Russia’s statements. Take Al-Tanf’s Wikipedia page. The original entry smears the Al-Tanf rebels by calling them armed gangs and militants that are training terrorists, who the U.S. helps transport. The user who wrote all this has uploaded photos elsewhere that show a Russia connection. How? Well, one, they show a city Russian advisers were in at the time. Two, the file names are all in Russian. And, three, one is taken from the inside of a Russian military vehicle, like the one seen here elsewhere in Syria. Al-Tanf is just one example of how Russia’s presence in Syria has contributed to yet another reason the U.S. mission has expanded — preventing unchecked Russian influence. After more recent Russian threats, the U.S. sends Marines to Al-Tanf as a show of force. [gunfire] The base that looked like this after those airstrikes against pro-regime forces, has grown even bigger. And soon after, a top general arrives, stressing America’s support for the base. Construction on a new expansion begins three weeks later. “I don’t want to be in Syria forever. It’s sand. And it’s death.” President Trump reverses course, and orders a troop pullout from Syria. But there’s an ongoing debate in the government about whether to make Al-Tanf the exception, to keep troops there even after all other U.S. troops in the country have left. Will the base’s story end with the rebels and refugees left to fend for themselves, or will the U.S. decide to stay put to counter its rivals and small pockets of ISIS in a mission that has no end in sight? Whatever happens, remember: This is all taking place in just one small, remote corner of Syria, a country that’s in conflict from end to end. So 23 seconds into this video, I mentioned a border crossing, the one the rebels use to cross into Syria. Turns out, the Syrian civil war isn’t the only time conflict touched this crossing. I found these images from the Iraq war from 2007. These are refugees flooding the Al-Tanf crossing, trying to get out of Iraq. Back then, Syria was far safer.

President Trump has ordered the withdrawal of U.S. military forces from Syria. But the unexpectedly large role of Al-Tanf, a small U.S. outpost in Syria, reveals why leaving the country won’t be so easy.CreditCredit...Carlos Lopez/U.S. Marine Corps

A meeting in late January of the National Security Council’s “deputies committee” — the No. 2 leaders of national security departments and agencies — recommended allowing the Syrian Democratic Forces, a coalition of Kurdish and Arab fighters, to keep the equipment the Pentagon has provided them and for an American-led air campaign to continue airstrikes to defend them against the Islamic State, according to two senior American officials.

Any new basing arrangements would require Iraqi approval. The overall assistance proposal endorsed by the deputies committee still requires cabinet-level approval. But during his visit to Iraq in late December, Mr. Trump signaled his support for basing more commandos in Iraq to “prevent an ISIS resurgence.”

The strike teams are among the options in a new, evolving strategy for Syria that the Pentagon is developing as officials follow the order Mr. Trump gave in December to withdraw some 2,000 troops. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis resigned soon after that, largely because of Mr. Trump’s decision to overrule his senior advisers and withdraw the troops.

The Pentagon says it is in the process of complying with Mr. Trump’s withdrawal order, after commanders persuaded him to reverse his initial demand to pull out in 30 days in favor of a schedule of about four months. “We are on a deliberate, coordinated, disciplined withdrawal,” Patrick M. Shanahan, the acting defense secretary, told reporters last week.

The American military has started withdrawing some equipment, but not yet troops, officials said on Sunday. The number of American troops in Syria has actually increased in recent weeks to more than 3,000 — a standard practice to bring in additional security and logistics troops temporarily to help protect and carry out the process of pulling out — three Defense Department officials said.

The scope and pace of withdrawal were one of the topics discussed when Gen. Joseph L. Votel, the head of the Pentagon’s Central Command, convened his top commanders and civilian advisers in Doha, Qatar, in late January. Many details have yet to be worked out, but under the current planning, the Kurdish and Arab fighters would be permitted to keep American-supplied weapons for self-defense, a nod to military threats from Turkish officials who consider the Kurds an enemy, a senior American official said.

Meantime, several factions in the Iraqi Parliament plan to push a measure that would strictly limit the United States’ military activities in the country, including where American soldiers can circulate and how long they can stay.

The issue brings together Shiite parties who do not like Americans, most notably the one led by the radical cleric Moktada al-Sadr. That group now has the largest bloc of votes, with Shiite parties that have strong links to Iran and that are associated with armed groups known collectively as the Hashid.

While the measure is still in the planning stages, the parliamentary party representing Mr. al-Sadr announced about a week ago that it would put the issue on Parliament’s legislative agenda for March, and the party’s lawmakers have begun discussing the idea with other parliamentary blocs.

Image

Gen. Joseph L. Votel, the head of the Pentagon’s Central Command, at the al-Tanf military outpost in southern Syria in October.Credit...Lolita Baldor/Associated Press

Joining with the Sadr faction is the Fateh coalition, whose members include political representatives of the mostly Shiite Muslim armed groups that sprang up when the Islamic State invaded northern Iraq in 2014. Some of these armed factions have close ties to Iran and initially were partially funded and supplied by Iran. Today, however, all the Iraqi armed groups are legal and paid by the Iraqi government, and say they have merged their command structure.

Mr. Trump’s comments in the CBS interview echoed his administration’s previous claims that Iran is cheating on the spirit of the 2015 nuclear agreement from which the United States has withdrawn, an assertion contradicted in an American intelligence assessment last week that concluded that Iran is not, for now, taking steps necessary to make a bomb.

In an apparent reference to Al Asad Air Base in western Iraq, which Mr. Trump visited during a whirlwind trip to the country in late December, the president said in the CBS interview that the United States has “an unbelievable and expensive military base built in Iraq” that is “perfectly situated for looking at all over different parts of the troubled Middle East.”

In fact, American forces operate from several Iraqi bases across the country, with most of the roughly 5,200 troops based at Al Asad or in Erbil in northern Iraq.

Iraq is the one war zone where Mr. Trump has not promised a rapid withdrawal of troops. Late last year, just before his visit to the country, Mr. Trump declared victory over the Islamic State — a conclusion American intelligence agencies have since contradicted as premature.

Since then the American-led coalition has significantly escalated its bombing campaign against the last remnants of the group. Pentagon officials say they want to inflict as much damage as possible before the drawdown starts. The coalition carried out about 1,200 strikes in Syria in January, compared with 952 in December and 639 in November, according to military statistics.

The last die-hard fighters are hunkered down in two villages, or about 1.5 square miles of territory, along the Euphrates River near Syria’s border with Iraq. Mr. Shanahan said last week that those last shards of territory will be seized “within a couple weeks.”

Mr. Trump’s spy chiefs warned him last week in public testimony that the Islamic State will remain extremely dangerous.

“While ISIS is nearing territorial defeat in Iraq and Syria, the group has returned to its guerrilla warfare roots while continuing to plot attacks and direct its supporters worldwide,” Dan Coats, the director of national intelligence, told the Senate Intelligence Committee.